<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>A New Language Tag?</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/clayco/archive/2004/04/01/106053.aspx</link><description>Those of you who know about RFC 3066 know that it's the standard which describes the tags that you should use to identify the language of an HTML or XML document's contents. For example, in XHTML you'd code something like: . . . &amp;lt;html xmlns=" http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: A New Language Tag?</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/clayco/archive/2004/04/01/106053.aspx#106252</link><pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2004 10:15:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:106252</guid><dc:creator>Justin Rogers</dc:creator><description>If people are going to type their messages using such formatting (and a somewhat common formatting), that does appear to have some small semblance of structure and grammatical ruleset, then it makes sense to have a language tag for it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If we ever have a hope that intelligent computing devices can make sense of the world without having to use extreme categorization skills only present currently in ourselves, then it might be nice to give them a heads up when they are about to start scanning spam-porn.</description></item></channel></rss>